THH149

I would love to see training scenarios for Black Sea but while this resource is a good starting point I do worry its not quite up to date enough to deal with drones, precision artillery and ATGMs are much more lethal but armour defenses so different and so much more complex ....
Does anyone have insights into new model army doctrine .... In ukraine fighting the battle seems to be over once a few dudes or a vehicle dies, and I wonder why that is - maybe all guns are now trained on that battlefield it become too lethal to be seen?
THH

Here's the story of the 93 Brigade UAF at the Airport ...
 

this is the most recent unclassified info on Russian forces.
 
https://www.cna.org/CNA_files/PDF/Russian-Forces-in-the-Western-Military-District.pdf

Nah, its the easier of the two if you enjoy attacking (as Soviet) ....

Both sides aren't using the same eyeballs and binos though - there are significant differences in equipment, even on the rifleman's level - all US soldiers have thermal optics, for a start, and the Javelin launch unit (which operates with or without missiles) might well be the best single spotting device in CM.

The tank example was only representative - the principles are identical, and the point is that to overcome the deficiency in optics you need to rely on numbers. It's typically significantly easier to play with quality than quantity, mind you.

The point on Training Scenarios is a good one. I've long thought this kind of thing would be good for all titles, and would help things significantly - scenarios which aren't supposed to be difficult, just doctrinal examples of specific things.

For example, a common refrain is how "useless" the British 2 inch mortars are in CMBN. This is firmly incorrect, but presumably their use is non-obvious. If there was a doctrinal platoon attack scenario for the British rifle platoon, then you could have a yardstick to measure other things by - essentially, a "If you can't win this, you don't understand it yet" test. Later scenarios can then build off this with greater complexity and additional problems.

With the CMCW tutorials, there is a direct line between the tutorials and the Soviet campaign. The "attack" scenario teaches the fundamentals (mass, firepower, speed), and the "meeting engagement" then takes those and adds the complexity of a flexible, more typical scenario, where you have to be fluid and adapt, rather than just move forward and shoot. The first Soviet campaign mission is then a doctrinal meeting engagement, but you're now facing an enemy which is really trying to beat you, and has the ability to put you through hell. A->B->C. If you tried to jump straight in at C you'd miss most of the context.

Even more so ....
 

So, what will you listen to while you'll be racking your brain over your pixeltruppen's life?
A bit anachronistic given the time frame, but to me it will be Nena's 99 Luftballons.


 

I just had to share...
I have one split AT team posted in one of the buildings out in the front of the US setup zone.  Those two men in the last turn went from "cowering" from artillery, to then quickly and calmly taking out a T-72 at about 350m with a Dragon on the far right that had sprinted across the open ground and was approaching one of my infantry squads posted in the woods over there, direct hit on the flank of the Soviet tank instantly killed it.  They immediately went to pinned and shaken after this kill because of the artillery still landing around the buildings, the AT gunner calmly reloads the Dragon, turns to the front, sees another T-72 coming around those buildings in front about 500m away, aims and makes a one shot kill of that tank!  All in one minute!  
They are definitely getting medals in my book, if they survive....

I don't know about anybody else but that seems like it would be a interesting venue for some scenarios, new vehicles and troops, related to the cold war. I feel like that would be a interesting direction for battlefront to look into a expansion of course after British/West Germany/Nato troops, East Germany/Warsaw Pact countries, North German Plain Ect.  what do all of you think?

Fun mission, 17 of my casualties were from artillery and enemy CAS, only one M150 and one M60A2 actually got taken out by enemy tanks with ammo detonations on both of them. I'm much more impressed by the accuracy of the artillery than I was with either the TOW or Shillelagh, I took out two tanks and I'm guessing disabled another just using the artillery on point target.

I'm on my third playthrough. 1st as US, put the M60s hull down on the flanks and slaughtered the Ruskies at long range. 
2nd as the Red storm I held off at long range with the T72s and blasted the linear road target with mortars and rockets. Then sent in one aircraft.  It seems only one MANPAD had survived and it missed. My tanks killed everything eventually, including the TOW 113s. Although I had wiped out the US force with negligible casualties (2 BMPs and a damaged tank, lost all the foot scouts though), I was just too slow in getting to the road so got a Russian Minor Defeat. 
Game 3 I am not doing so well as the Soviets. Although I felt I used the arty and air better, there was less effect and got one plane shot down.  Minor variations in deployment of the armour (or bad luck in not spotting the M150s immediately) means I am down a few tanks with both M150s and 2-3 M60s still active. 16 minutes left on the clock.
I don't think there is much wrong with the game design, but the TacAI of my own troops is frustrating me. BMPs don't seem to fire their 73mm. I can't seem to shell places where I think US troops are hiding; they have wasted a few ATGMs on buildings though. The long delay in bringing down artillery does hamper my attacks.  The two ground attack aircraft use their cannons mostly and depart the scene with most of their bombs and missiles onboard - they seem to spend about 5 minutes between attacks coming round.  So it is difficult to bring the full firepower of my Evil Commie B'staads to bear on the Lackey Capitalist running dogs of the US army.

Guys you have to play CMBS more  RUS vs US or Excellent RUS (BMP-3/T-90) vs UKR  Thermals teach to:
Never ever move armor to a place that can be fired at from a place that has not been under observation by two observer teams for at least a minute (and two-three minutes is much-much better). Count seconds for your vehicle exposure. 3secs for APs, 5secs for HEATs, 10secs for TL/ATGMs at medium distances. That is the time for the actual exposure - vehicles take some time to drive out of the view. Use pop-and-hide multiple times to trigger a shot and thus force a lengthy reload for an enemy armor. That reveals enemy armor position as a bonus if you have eyes to look at  Find unconventional observation angles for observer teams. Putting even 1-2 psn observation teams in front of enemy armor with thermals is a sure recipe for disaster. Even 1.0-1.5km distance is not enough - thermals can sometimes acquire targets pretty quickly. Be greedy with the number of people in observation teams. One guy is waaaay better than two and two is always better than three. Yes, you'd need more time to dwell upon the battlefield but you'd keep your guys alive. Hopefully How CMCW is easier than CMBS (so far ):
No Javs that can be fired from inside the buildings with impunity. No thermals for US infantry. Relatively few thermals for US armor. PS
CMCW is a really great game! Czechmate is a really great scenario

I am down to 27 minutes left in this scenario.  I suspect I will probably get some sort of victory but I would rank this one as similar to some of those really difficult Black Sea scenarios.  If you stick up your head, it gets shot off.  
Spoilers---
Down to 27 minutes and I still have not been able to use vehicle firepower whether tank or BTR.  Every attempt has resulted in destroyed vehicles.  I have managed to take out all the M60s and Bradleys with my ATGMs but one Bradley...hopefully.  Also there could still be an effective M-60 somewhere.  However then I discovered masses of infantry dragons and at least one dismounted TOW.    I believe a minimum of 6 dragons.  Far more than I would expect from a platoon of infantry.  I have taken out several dragons with infantry and artillery but I am also running out of artillery.  At this point, there is still at least one dragon and one dismounted TOW covering the bridge and possibly one other dragon.  Mortar fire is no guarantee of a destroyed ATGM.  I hit one behind a wall fairly heavily with mortar and spotted again later and not one casualty.  So basically I have resigned myself to an infantry advance from the left ridges to the objective and it has to from my left.  I did get an infantry platoon across the bridge but then discovered a dismounted HMG with flanking fire on the far side of the bridge.  There is also an AGL which should be able to put firepower into that same area but hasn't yet.  Without vehicle firepower that platoon can't neutralize that HMG or the AGL if it opens fire.  I will put smoke on those two identified ATGMs and try to rush some tanks across the bridge and hopefully find some dead ground not covered by ATGMs but I don't have high hopes and time is running out.  But if I can get a couple tanks across and keep them alive, even with only 15 minutes left, they could help tremendously.  So the main assault will be infantry on my left and they have a lot of ground to cover and the last Bradley and possibly an M-60.  This is, IMO, a high difficulty scenario and how much you enjoy it will depend on how much you enjoy a very tough challenge.

It's worth mentioning that in the first mission of the Soviet campaign, you'll have pre-battle intel, and enough artillery to lay down a decent fire mission.

This is doctrinal - about 10-30 minutes (which isn't a long time!) before the Forward Security element, you'll have a combat reconnaissance patrol to find enemy positions and routes of advance. That's partly simulated with pre-battle info, and partly explicit with the BTR platoon in the Soviet campaign. Those pre-battle spots should be hit with pre-planned barrages.

When the FSE advance guard arrives, they immediately attack. The intention is that they engage with the known enemy straight away, and try to break through by themselves. If they can, great, but if they can't then the FSE will act as a base of fire for the main body when it arrives. Implicit in this is that there will be some *unknown* enemy positions, and that's the licks you'll have to take. If the CRP has failed to do its job, then the FSE needs to do a probing attack instead, and pretty sharpish.

This is the "flexible" side of Soviet tactical doctrine - there's not much in terms of small unit tactics, since platoons tend to act as one, and on-line, but the how you use those platoons in concert, especially coming off the match, is really important, and can be very sophisticated.

To illustrate, an example of a successful FSE attack from The Russian Way of War (Grau, 2017):




 
The Russian Way of War is focused on modern Russian operations, but the principle is identical to the Soviet method (and the diagrams are great).

Again, "How to Soviet" is a combination of Firepower, Speed and Aggression. Push, push, push. Keep them off-balance and reeling from the amount of fire you can lay down, and then use your speed to destabilise and not give them the chance to recover.
 

Well it depends which version of the Soviet Campaign we are talking about.  Standard actually allows the player to lose the first battle (i.e. they get a second chance).  March or Die...well sorry but as the name suggests...win or die.
Scenario one is tough (though not the toughest) but it is built straight from Soviet doctrine for an ME (less main force):

The trick on this one, at least as I saw it, was to advance up the right hard and fast with the FSE.  You are going to take loses but if you can get infantry in those trees on the first small ridge you are in a good position.  You need to keep clearing up on the right until the Adv Guard shows up...and from there I wish you luck. 
If you hate to lose "anything" I am not sure the Soviet Campaign is for you then.  The overall strategy here has to be "lose enough but not too much", which is a really hard balancing act.  I specifically designed the Soviet Campaign to be a significant challenge for the advanced player, it is also one of the more realistic set of scenarios for the Soviets in the game.

The Soviets outnumber to American force 3 to 1.  There is one thing that you neglected to notice in your Soviet OB.  You have a lot of ATGMs that apparently you chose not to use.  You also have way more infantry firepower than the US force.  The US force is anti armor focused and the Soviet force is Infantry heavy.  The American ATGMs are easily taken out with the mortars because they are not dug in.  The problem isn't the Soviet OB.  The problem is your ability to use it to best advantage.
The American force is only two platoons btw.  Well, one infantry platoon and one Cavalry troop, but the Cavalry troop has no infantry so it's really like a big tank platoon.
Regarding the Soviet ATGMs since you asked - the 2500meter variety show up near the top of the hill on your side because - well if you were smart you would put them on that hill so they can fire into the town since they can see all the way down into the valley from up there.  The other infantry all have 1000 meter ATGMs that if you happen to notice the bluff near the bridge - well a smart man would notice that if he put his ATGMs up on that bluff maybe, just maybe, all those ATGMs could also fire into the town.  At that point you wouldn't need any tanks because your ATGMs would take out the M60s and your artillery could take out the TOW.  Now that I told you what to do maybe you can try it again.
Honestly I'm having a lot of trouble understanding why so many are having so much trouble with this scenario.  The bluff on the other side of the river near the bridge is just sitting there screaming "hey come on over here and deploy on me".  If you don't like that bluff there is plenty of high ground on your side of the river too.  The TOWs can only take out so many vehicles so if you wanted to rush them up to the intersection above the bridge you could put ATGMs in several locations over there too.  You are only dealing with one American infantry platoon and you have two Soviet infantry companies.  I mean seriously....
 

To drag this thread closer to the subject of its title, there are no real nuances to avoiding getting whacked by aircraft.  If you have air defence assets then deploy them:
With half-decent fields of view/fire into the sky. In positions to cover the stuff you really really don't want to see get destroyed. Close to stocks of further missiles. In addition to the above, and/or if you don't have air defence assets:
Use smoke to either obscure your really important stuff from the enemy asset calling in the air asset. Get yourself into woods or other terrain that offers you good concealment and, where possible cover as well. Seek out and utterly smash every single C2 and dedicated observation asset the enemy has. Employ rapid manoeuvre. Ultimately though, there is a fair amount of abstraction in the modelling of air/aviation and their engagement by ground assets so you will always be susceptible to the fortunes of war when you hear the sound of freedom above your troops.

Noticed a few odd things in the QB side of CW:
- The US is allocatted Engineers as infantry in most games where AI is allowed to select forces
- Soviets sometimes get air controller but no airpower, or no airpower but there are air controllers
- rarely, an art battery has no on board artiller controller
- Soviets can sometimes get a profundity of Strela teams (like, 6-8 strela) 
Now, I'm currently using the odd-bods as scouts but seems costly when they depart this world.
Can BFC fix those?
Best
TTH

The difference being that the Sov tanks are actually pretty reliable and not likely to have broken final drives or caught fire while deploying, plus they have more tanks than you do. 
 
It’s a problem, especially in ‘79. The other shoe is that the Sov have good supporting weapons. The BMP was revolutionary and outclasses the M113, and the Soviet infantry has a very good AT weapon in the RPG. Hunting tanks with infantry is a thing that can be done. Plus there is the artillery. So much arty. 
 
H

Yep, the fundamentals are the same. The existence of TOWs does shift this equation to an extent, as well as DPICM and the like, but it's still "how can I best play a weak hand".

You can download it as a PDF from the same source.

Direct link to the download:

https://books.google.co.uk/books/download/The_Tank_and_Mechanized_Infantry_Company.pdf?id=My8-u2rYNVoC&output=pdf&sig=ACfU3U06Zb4xV8A0m8XvTa5ggK0pkajSZQ

@chuckdykeyes you can do this in the editor but it can be tricky if you want your Tiger to go to a hull down terrain spot because you create the AI plan in 2D.  The mechanism to move the tank would be a simple trigger to have the Tiger move from its hide.  So if you want it to move to its fire position from its hide when hordes of T-34s come over the horizon then you would set an enemy armour trigger to trip at a time and space that allows your Tiger to move from its hide and get into the hull down fire position.  On firing the trigger, the Tiger moves.  You can specify an exact action spot for it to go to (your hull down position) but to get it exactly right you need to correlate that position that is obvious in 3D mode to the 2D action spot in the AI editor which is the tricky part and requires testing and adjusting frequently.

Well, time ain't the problem for me in this one.
But timing may be.  In the sense that the Germans counter-attack.  I think I need to get deployed into good positions to take them out as they rush to counter-attack.
The other part of it is I am unsure what event in the scenario triggers their counter-attack,  Killing a pillbox?  Taking out an AA gun?  Stepping on certain area of ground?
I was actually moving slowly and carefully as I have 170min for a scenario (small) which really is a lot of time, but I think only greater speed on my part will jam up their counter attack.
---
Well, we will find out.

I was playing a 2 hour Black Sea scenario the other day and just felt like watching the battle unfold, with Russians attacking a US manned town with a fort (Fort Apache?).
Anyway, I was "playing" Blue by not moving a unit, I could watch Red force let their attack unfold.
Curiously, my immobile Blueforce won a major victory against the AI.  Surely that doesn't bode well for a competitive match against the AI or a human player!
Should designers have a new test of their scenario where they AI needs to win a handy victory against an immobile human defense? Could BFC use that test to qualify a scenario for inclusion in a module?
Disclaimer: I did move all the US reinforcements en bloc to the center of the objective in the town.
Disclaimer: the US artillery landed as an emergency maximum barrage on the centre of the objective in the town.
Best
THH

Just finished my second playthrough. First as the US, I destroyed the Soviet force and got a total victory without too much trouble but a couple of the M60s got heavily damaged with their guns knocked out. I don't remember if I lost any of the M60s outright, but a bunch of my infantry got killed by artillery.
Second playthrough as the Soviets and it went surprisingly well. Way better than I thought it would after I stupidly ran one of the recon teams right into American pre-planned artillery at the start. After that, one of the T72s started taking potshots at an M60 from the far edge of the map. The M60 popped smoke and pulled back after a couple non-penetrating hits. Then two more M60s popped smoke and reversed. I took this as an opportunity to charge my entire force at full speed ahead to some dead ground in the center of the map. There I hid them until the moment was right.
I had my air support set to come in after a delay, and when they finally came in they proceeded to do jack. One of the planes circled around, did nothing and then left, then the other blew up a standard M113 with a missile and then got shot down. Every single one of the US MANPADs survived the bombardment. No matter though, because after that, all my reinforcements had arrived and I had every vehicle in my force charge forward from the dead ground in one giant mass. The Americans didn't stand a chance. I overran the American right flank, wiping out their entire force within minutes. There were still 20 minutes left on the clock. I lost only 7 dead and 4 wounded, with 3 tanks lost and a few more damaged. One tank stuck in the mud. The Americans only had 4 men remaining out of 80.
Very fun scenario and good game. 

The .50 MG is nice but the gunner is a bit exposed and the vehicle itself is so easily knocked out.  The approaching task force has at least 2 tank companies plus attached infantry.  In a day battle, I would assume the attack leads with tanks and I have TOWs and Dragons to confront the tank threat.  However it is a night battle.  I don't know Soviet night doctrine but I wouldn't be surprised to see them leading with infantry.  Either way, as soon as 20+ tanks show up, the .50 cal M-113s become nothing but targets.  So my thoughts are the M-113s need to be safely tucked away as soon as the tank threat is identified.  Once the tank threat is neutralized, then the .50 M-113s can re-emerge.